Gross Negligence Manslaughter

• What is the actus reus for gross negligence manslaughter?

  • The defendant owed the victim a duty of care
  • The D breached their duty of care
  • At the time of the breach, there was a serious and obvious risk of death
  • It was foreseeable the risk would give rise to a serious and obvious risk of death
  • Jury has to see it as so bad it is criminal
  • Can be an act or omission
• How can Rv Singh and R v Litchfield be used to show the duty owed a duty of care to the V for gross negligence manslaughter?

  R v Singh: The D was a landlord of a property in which a faulty gas fire led to deaths of tenants. Court recognised that there was a duty to the V’s to maintain the property

  R v Litchfield: D was owner of a ship and he sailed knowing the engines might fail.  3 people died. He owed them a duty of care
• How can R v Whacker and R v Khan and Khan be used to show the duty owed a duty of care to the V for gross negligence manslaughter?

  R v Khan and Khan: D sold heroin to a teenager and she used twice the amount. She fell into a coma and D left. Returned to find her dead. She would have survived if she got medical attention. The courts stated a duty extended to illegal stuff

  R v Whacker: D was bringing illegal immigrants into England and they only had a small vent to breath. It was closed when boarding a ferry to avoid detection. It took longer than expected at 58/60 died. 
• What does It mean for the D to breach a duty of care to the V in gross negligence manslaughter?

  Would the reasonable person act in that same way. If not there would be a breach of care
• What does a serious and obvious risk of death mean for gross negligence manslaughter?

  Serious: qualifies the nature of of the risk of death as something more than minimal. Risk of injury even serious injury isn’t enough. 

  Obvious: The risk would have been present, clear, and unambiguous. It is immediately apparent rather than something that would eventually become apparent
• What is R v Rose and how was there a serious risk of death?

  The D did an eye exam on V but the V died 5 months later of hydrocephalus and it was recognisable by any competent optometrist. The D was given the wrong results so wasn’t her fault and didn’t breach the duty of care to the V.
• What does it mean that the breach of duty caused death for gross negligence manslaughter?

  The breach of duty must be proved and that the breach caused the death, Whether the breach is factual is for jury to decide.
• What does it mean for the circumstances of the breach to be bad for gross negligence manslaughter?

  The jury must decided if the breach was truly exceptionally bad and can justify it amounted to gross negligence and required a criminal sanction